Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Remarks in the Khabouris manuscript margin
#16
Akhi Chuck,

Here are some fragments from the University of Chicago, of a 6th-century manuscript. They are nearly identical to modern-day printed versions.

http://goodspeed.lib.uchicago.edu/ms/ind...iew=thumbs

+Shamasha
Reply
#17
:

Thank you Shamasha Paul for those links...wow. So awesome to know about.
Reply
#18
Thirdwoe Wrote::

I like the Khabouris text...what's wrong with it? <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Shlama,
Chuck

Shlama Chuck:
There is nothing wrong with the Khabouris/Kaboris Codex. I only found one scribal error, which I have noted as Mark 14:35. The word "wanafal" of the Khabouris Codex is spelled wrong (wanalaf) and takes away the sense "and fell". This error is easy to discern.

BTW, My main reason for doing the transcription was not because it is the oldest, but basically because it is a faithful copy. The Khabouris Codex has a new owner, and copyright law prevents him from sharing the "enhanced Colophon". My transcription of the Khabouris Codex (as is), minus a transcription of the Colophon, is what it is. The lower resolution pictures, taken from the internet can be legally displayed , but not the enhanced pictures done at Better Light, without express permission from the new owner.

It reads identical to the short section I received of the Yonan Codex (5th Century) and my transcription of those two pages of the Yonan Codex, The passage from the Gospel of John 6:64b - 7:28a is deposited at <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m --> on the Yonan Codex page. In short, the Original Eastern Peshitta New Testament text has been well established.

I still would like to see the whole Yonan Codex in transcription, but that's another story. I'm satisfied with the established Eastern Peshitta text of the New Testament, that is read in The Assyrian Church.

Shlama,
Stephen
Reply
#19
I love how all of these scholars study the Peshitta without even the slightest consideration that it could be the best preserved Apostolic New Testament text. Etheridge states that Ephrem quoted the Peshitta as a long established version in the 4th century, when scholars claim the Peshitta to have been standardized.
Reply
#20
Actually, the content and photographs of the Khabouris Manuscript under US and UK Copyright laws are in the Public Domain due to the text's age. One cannot legally claim copyright to them (as per Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. 1999) as it'd be like claiming copyright on the Statue of David or the Eiffel Tower. "Better lighting" or "enhanced imaging" of this sort doesn't count, as Frederick Warne Co. tried that with "retouching" and "restoring" the original images to The Tale of Peter Rabbit and then trying to claim copyright on the restoration. Their claim was thrown out of court as immaterial due to the fact that despite all of their enhancements that the core material remained the same. Any claims to the contrary are dubious.

This in mind, I'd love to see an image alongside a transcription of the colophon. <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink -->

Peace,
-Steve
Reply
#21
I was sort of wondering how they had a copyright on a 1,000 year old document...
Reply
#22
I have talked to the person who has all the images from better light, they person who took then. I have his phone number, and talked with him. He didn't want to send me a copy of them, but told me that only two others had been given copies by him and that they were high res, and much better than the ones available online, but not at all as high res as his original images. He gave me the numbers of both persons, and I called one, and couldn't get in touch with them, and the other person said his bishop would not allow them to be shared, as they were hoping to publish them one day i.e. make some money off them.

Also, I was told by Eric Rivera, that by th time he had worked on getting the images made, the Khabouris had more missing pages than are shown online from the other images made some time earlier.

Presently the Codex is owned by Steve Green, owner of Hobby Lobby, and he is hoping to put it on display in a traveling manuscript museum...where one can take a look at it for a fee...again, to make money. So, while the money people have it and the images, we can't check it out any closer than the old images. Eric says it doesn't matter though, because the words are all the same anyway in the Eastern Peshitta manuscripts. If you have read one, you have read them all, and we can be quite certain that what we have today in the Church of the East's text, is the same as it has always been from the time they received the 1st manuscript.

I gave Shamasha Paul Eric's number, as Eric had said he would share the image of the colophon with him, but I haven't heard back if this ever happened.

Shlama,
Chuck
Reply
#23
I have talked to the person who has all the images from better light, they person who took then. I have his phone number, and talked with him. He didn't want to send me a copy of them, but told me that only two others had been given copies by him and that they were high res, and much better than the ones available online, but not at all as high res as his original images. He gave me the numbers of both persons, and I called one, and couldn't get in touch with them, and the other person said his bishop would not allow them to be shared, as they were hoping to publish them one day i.e. make some money off them.

Also, I was told by Eric Rivera, that by th time he had worked on getting the images made, the Khabouris had more missing pages than are shown online from the other images made some time earlier.

Presently the Codex is owned by Steve Green, owner of Hobby Lobby, and he is hoping to put it on display in a traveling manuscript museum...where one can take a look at it for a fee...again, to make money. So, while the money people have it and the images, we can't check it out any closer than the old images. Eric says it doesn't matter though, because the words are all the same anyway in the Eastern Peshitta manuscripts. If you have read one, you have read them all, and we can be quite certain that what we have today in the Church of the East's text, is the same as it has always been from the time they received the 1st manuscript.

I gave Shamasha Paul Eric's number, as Eric had said he would share the image of the colophon with him, but I haven't heard back if this ever happened.

Shlama,
Chuck
Reply
#24
I don't see why they're so hesitant to show the colophon. They have pictures online of the Great Isaiah Scroll, yet they still show it to the public in museums (for a fee, I'm sure). It's always cooler to see the manuscripts themselves than to see them online, so I doubt they'd lose money off of it. The Khabouris Codex isn't exactly extraordinarily well-known by most people anyway.
Reply
#25
I have a fairly good idea why they are hesitant to publish the colophon properly, but I am going to reserve my comments here about that for a day in the future when we can look back at the present state of things and chuckle. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Peace,
-Steve
Reply
#26
SteveCaruso Wrote:I have a fairly good idea why they are hesitant to publish the colophon properly, but I am going to reserve my comments here about that for a day in the future when we can look back at the present state of things and chuckle. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Peace,
-Steve

Shlama Akhi Steve:
Good idea. Please share your thoughts?

Kindly,
Stephen P. Silver
Reply
#27
Just to be clear, that "you" wasn't referring to you Stephen. I realize that, at a glance, it might casually be confused that way.

But as I said, I'm reserving comment here until some things play out. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Peace,
-Steve
Reply
#28
SteveCaruso Wrote:Just to be clear, that "you" wasn't referring to you Stephen. I realize that, at a glance, it might casually be confused that way.

But as I said, I'm reserving comment here until some things play out. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Peace,
-Steve

Shlama Steve:
OK. You've caught my curiosity. <!-- s:| --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/neutral.gif" alt=":|" title="Neutral" /><!-- s:| -->

Stephen
Reply
#29
Stephen, I sent you Eric Rivera's phone number, right? Did you call him yet?

In any case, since the Goodspeed manuscript {6th century} <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://goodspeed.lib.uchicago.edu/ms/index.php?doc=0716">http://goodspeed.lib.uchicago.edu/ms/index.php?doc=0716</a><!-- m --> reads just as the Khabouris does, in every place, I say we can rest assured that what is in the Khabouris text, is what has always been in the Eastern Peshitta text, since the days of the Apostles. Being of latter date, such as the Mingana manuscript of 1613, in regards to the text of the Eastern Peshitta...is no problem, since they all have the same text anyway. It isn't even in the same universe when it comes to the mess we find in the Greek manuscript witnesses.

Concerning the Khabouris Colophon, Eric Rivera told me that even with the super high res image, it's too far gone to read...but, perhaps with a special process it might be able to be deciphered.

Speaking of the Aramaic NT Scriptures, as they have always existed in the Eastern Peshitta text, since the days of the Apostles till now, Steve, I'm still waiting for you to tell me where to find "The Aramaic New Testament" on your website project, which has the title in big letters on the main page, thus, "The Aramaic New Testament"....You told me to ask you about it, but I haven't heard back yet, and it been a number of weeks now....all I can see there when I looked last, is an English translation (WEB) of one of Greek versions (Alexandrian) of the New Testament, and some interpolations you have made in its text, putting in what you surmise is the way Jesus might have spoken, in a hypothetical dialect, (which may or may not be the one He actually used at all), if it even existed at all.

And is there any NT manuscript evidence available that shows this supposed dialect?

I wonder, is your interpolations translated from The Peshitta Text, (namely the Eastern text), or is it just from the English translation you have up there?


.
Reply
#30
Thirdwoe Wrote:Steve, I'm still waiting for you to tell me where to find "The Aramaic New Testament" on your....

Oh Charley, this canard. Again. Continued from Facebook. Ad nauseam. Not interested.

If you can't read the pages under the "About This Site" tab (which I've referred you to a dozen times) then there truly is no helping you. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Find peace,
-Steve
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)